Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9723 Kant
Judgement Date : 27 June, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M. KHAZI
M.F.A. NO.5207 OF 2013 (SMA)
C/W
M.F.A.NO.7196 OF 2013 (SMA)
IN MFA NO.5207/2013:
BETWEEN:
SMT.SUSHMA RATTAN,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
D/O MR D R RATTAN,
RESIDING AT NO.62, 2ND CROSS,
LAKESHORE GARDEN, THINDU,
VIDYARANYAPURA,
BANGALORE - 560 097.
... APPELLANT
(BY MR.ER.H.MANJUNATH, ADV.,-ABSENT)
AND:
SRI.V.M.JAVEED,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O V M BARKATHULLA,
R/AT NO.3, BENSON CROSS ROAD,
BENSON ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 046.
... RESPONDENT
(BY MR. RAHUL CARIYAPPA K S, ADV., FOR C/R-ABSENT)
---
2
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 47(a) OF THE GUARDIANS
AND WARDS ACT, 1820, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 19.4.2013 PASSED IN G & WC NO.170/2009 ON THE
FILE OF THE III ADDL. PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER
SEC.27(1) (d) OF THE SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT.
IN MFA NO.7196/2013:
BETWEEN:
SMT.SUSHMA RATTAN,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
D/O MR D R RATTAN,
RESIDING AT NO.62, 2ND CROSS,
LAKESHORE GARDEN, THINDU,
VIDYARANYAPURA,
BANGALORE - 560 097.
AND ALSO AT
SMT SUSHMA RATTAN ALIAS AYESHA,
W/O V.M.JAVEED,
D/O D R RATTAN,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT No.28, "VIJAY RESIDENCY",
3RD MAIN, 2ND FLOOR,
CHINNANNA LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 030.
... APPELLANT
(BY MR.ER.H.MANJUNATH, ADV.,-ABSENT)
AND:
MR.V.M.JAVEED,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O V M BARKATHULLA,
R/AT No.28, "VIJAY RESIDENCY",
3RD MAIN, 2ND FLOOR,
CHINNANNA LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 030.
... RESPONDENT
(V.C.O DATED 27/08/2013 M/S KAMAL & BHANU
ADVOCATES(VK NOT FILED))
3
---
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 39 OF THE SPECIAL
MARRIAGE ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 19.4.2013 PASSED IN M.C.NO.477/2009 ON THE FILE
OF THE III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER
SEC.27(1) (d) OF THE SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT, FOR
DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
None for the appellant even when the
matter is called in the second round. It
appears, the appellant is not interested in
prosecuting the appeal. The same is dismissed
for want of prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE SS
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!